	"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel... By which also ye are saved... unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)

Does the Fossil Record Prove Evolution?

By Noel Chartier

Evolution for the most part is based on one's interpretation of sedimentary strata and the fossils found therein. Those who believe in Evolution appear to be convinced that the fossils found in rock layers all over the earth are the definite proof that creatures have been evolving upward into higher life forms over hundreds of millions of years. Evolutionists declare this process has been taking place through "natural selection" and "mutation", which leaves behind in its wake, the old models, so to say, which are replaced by higher forms of life.

Evolutionary Tree

Although Evolution cannot be seen happening today, this they say can be observed in the fossil record. "Survival of the Fittest" is the catch word to explain this alleged process throughout the ages and those creatures that could not adapt died out, producing no offspring and became extinct. On the other hand, the "strong" kept getting stronger, producing new and improved offspring adapting to their environment by arbitrarily changing its own function and form over eons of time..

But, if this hypothesis were indeed true, we would expect to find within the fossil record millions of specimens that have slowly changed from bacteria to algae to invertebrates to fish to amphibians to reptiles to birds and mammals and finally to man as shown in the Darwinian Tree.

However, when we examine the Evolutionary Tree we find that all of these species (or their counterparts) for the most part, are living today. So what really do we see in the fossil record? When we go to a museum of “natural history”, we primarily find only fossils of extinct creatures. This of course gives the impression (especially with the commentary supplied) that things have been changing for the better over long periods of time, and that all creatures found in the fossil record are very old, outdated and extinct creatures that have long ago ceased to exist.

But, if we were to see the whole of the fossil record, and we were not influenced from years of evolutionary training in the science class, and bombarded with evolutionary biased programs, journals and magazines etc, and if we were to go out into the field and examine the evidence for ourselves, I think we would come up with a totally different conclusion. So what we need to do, as the Bible instructs us to do, is to “Prove all things” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

There really are only two world views that exist today that propose where all things originated from, that is, supernatural Creation by the Almighty God, and Evolution, which purports that “the entire visible universe grew from a speck far smaller than a proton” (TIME, June 25, 2001, How the Universe Will End, p. 39), that exploded (“Big Bang”) 15 billion years ago.

In this article it is our hope that the readers will find that the mindless processes that are alleged to take place in and through Evolution are nothing more than a fantasy that has been thought out by men (and inspired by the devil) who have rejected the Bible and the one and only true God of Creation.

Fossil Facts

What we would first like to display for the discerning mind is what can really be observed in the fossil record, which is subtly hidden from the unsuspecting onlooker in the museums of natural history around the world. The conclusion that many are coming to when challenged with the alternate view to the long ages of Evolution is that the fossil record proves sudden appearance, which must be accomplished by a divine act of Creation.

When we observe the fossil record we will see only two pieces of evidence with which to make a rational and logical conclusion:

1. Fossils of extinct creatures and,
2. Fossils of creatures that are still living today.

From this observable evidence it can easily be seen that ALL the creatures still living today have not changed after “millions of years”. They have somehow mysteriously forgotten to evolve and look identical to their fossil counterpart.

Natural History museums spend very little space in their exhibits to let the onlooker understand that there are hundreds of fossilized creatures that are assumed to be hundreds of millions of years old that are actually living today, and they have not changed.

Another thing that is strangely missing from these displays are all the intermediate creatures that should exist (if Evolution is true) between invertebrates and vertebrates, fish and amphibians, the amphibians and reptiles, reptiles and the birds and mammals, and of course, monkeys and man.

In the gaps between all these taxonomies, should we not see thousands of intermediate creatures that have gradually changed from one species into another as Evolution claims? We should find ample evidence of transitionary fossils, but mysteriously it is absent in the evolutionary presentations.

One Evolutionist has thoughtfully asked, “Why is all the gradual change going on in those very gaps?” There is nothing found in between all the living kinds linking one species to another so they are most suitably called “Missing Links”, for the simple reason that they do not exist.

Even the most elite Evolutions have been baffled by the lack of transitionary fossils. Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard pointed out that “The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change ... All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms; transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt” (Gould, 1977).

Dr T. S. Kemp, Curator of Zoological collections of Oxford University said, “With few exceptions, radically new kinds of organisms appear for the first time in the fossil record already fully evolved, with most of their characteristic features present” (Kemp, 1999).

In all reality, the true evidence that exists in the fossil record is one of abrupt or the sudden appearance of fully formed and fully functional creatures. The evidence clearly points to the Creation model of all things whereby God said, “let there be …” and there was. “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is” (Exodus 20:11). “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth” (Psalm 33:6).

Furthermore, Evolution starts with dead matter, and dead matter has never been observed coming to life. In the world today we see that all life MUST come from life.

Living Fossils

Bats

It is amazing that fossil bats said to be millions of years old look the same today. Or is it amazing? Perhaps bats have always been bats.

Coelacanth

The Coelacanth was a creature presumed by the scientific body before 1953 to have been extinct for 75 million years and purported to be as old as 450 million years. Evolutionary scientists used the coelacanth fossils as evidence to support their theory that fish evolved into amphibians. It was hailed as one of the great missing links, which was well on it's way to becoming an amphibian, that is, until one was caught off the coast of Madagascar in the Indian Ocean. Surprisingly it looked the same as it's alleged 75 million year old fossilized ancestor. It was found to be a fully functional fish type creature that forgot to evolve.

At the Royal Tyrell Museum in Alberta Canada they still use this same philosophy to “prove” Evolution with models of fish in the water and then an Amphibian on dry land with his tail in the water. I pointed out to the curator that all I saw in their display was a fish (which exist today) and an amphibian (which exists today), one in the water, one on dry land. I saw no evolution happening in their display. What was missing were all the transitional creatures that are supposed to be in between but have not been found after centuries of digging. Perhaps they do not exist. The curator humbly agreed that this was a poor representation.

Crab

The crab is another species that has not changed one iota over "millions of years".

Shrimp: Supposedly 220 million years old.

Lobster

Dragonfly

Horseshoe Crab

Jelly Fish

Nautilus

Sea Horse

Mosquito

Fern

Wollemi Pine

When a stand of Wollemi Pines was found in an isolated area in Australia in 1994, the discovery was hailed as "the equivalent of finding a small dinosaur still alive on Earth". The Wollemi Pine has been thought to be extinct for millions of years, but when one is found, alas, it looks exactly like its predecessor.

Trilobite

A trilobite is a marine anthropoid that most believe has become extinct. There are many different varieties that range in size from about a quarter of an inch, up to 2 feet in diameter. While trilobites are said to be extinct for over 100 million years, there are certainly some living creatures that could pass for them today. In fact, there has been found fossil trilobites and footprints of a human in the same piece of rock proving that they co-existed with man as the Biblical record indicates. According to Evolution man is supposed to be 99 million years younger than trilobites.

Tadpole Shrimp

Snails

We got the fossil of these snails from Rene's Rock and Fossil Shop in British Columbia, Canada. The shops proprietor said these snails were 65 million years old. Back home in our ditch we have the same snails and they are living.

Turtle

Salamander

The Tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus)

Crocodile (200 million years old)

Snakes

Frogs

Sand Dollars

Here is a fossil sand dollar from Baja California, the skeleton of a sand dollar from the Gulf of Mexico, and two living specimens also from the Gulf of Mexico. Once again, we fail to see evolution in action.

Giant Penguin (Icadyptes salasi)

A complete skeleton of a giant penguin was recently found in the tropics of Peru that is said to be 36 million years old. The skull is here compared to the skull of the only penguin living in Peru today along with an artists rendition of this 5 foot tall creature. There are no fewer than 17 species of penguins living today and scientists recognize approximately 32 species that have become extinct. Evolutionists claim that penguins probably evolved from flying birds 40 million years ago but the evidence supports the fact that penguins have always been penguins, although many species within the penguin "kind" have become extinct.

Here is the challenge to those who believe that the fossil record proves Evolution. If every fossil whose counterpart is still living, has not changed in “millions of years”, why should we believe that the fossils whose species are now extinct have changed from a lower life form prior to their becoming extinct?

If hundreds of “living fossils” have not changed, why sould we believe that the extinct creatures did change, especially when the fossil record is void of any intermediate fossils between the species they are alleged to have changed into? I believe it is simply this, people believe it because this is what they are told all their lives without sincerely examining the evidence for themselves. “Prove all things” (2Thessalonians 5:21).

How do creatures become extinct?

If the “present is the key to the past” as evolutionist are so keen to assert, then we must look at how creatures today become extinct. It usually boils down to just a few reasons such as climatic changes, introduction of natural predators, the destruction of habitat, natural disasters, disease, or usually, they were hunted into extinction.

The current theory, at least for the extinction of many of the reptilian creatures (dinosaurs), is that a meteorite hit the earth 65 million years ago causing the earth to undergo great climatic changes that the dinosaurs could not survive. But, this is hard to believe since there are hundreds of different reptilian types that are still alive and well today.

In our present day there are many animals on the endangered species list and others only exist in captivity. But the sad fact is that extinctions are continuing today. We could list hundreds of creatures that have recently become extinct, but here are a few:

The Carolina Parakeet was a creature that used to thrive in the southeastern United States. But when this bird developed a liking for the seeds of many kinds of fruit and grain crops, it was then deemed a pest sealing its fate to wholesale annihilation. Deforestation for agricultural purposes further reduced its habitat. The last of these birds was seen in the 1920's in Florida where its final stand of forest was located.

Bali is a small island that used to be home to the Bali Tiger but Human activity, agriculture (coffee and coconut cultivation), collection of firewood, increasing tourism and uncontrolled hunting for sport pushed the tiger into smaller and smaller regions until the last known Bali Tiger was shot and killed on the 27th of September 1937; this was an adult tigress.

The famous Dodo Bird inhabited the island of Mauritius in the Indian Ocean, where it lived undisturbed before the arrival of man. It lived and nested on the ground and ate fruits that had fallen from trees. There were no mammals on the island and a high diversity of bird species lived in the dense forests.

In 1505, the Portuguese became the first humans to set foot on Mauritius. The island quickly became a stopover for ships engaged in the spice trade. Weighing up to 50 pounds, the dodo was a welcome source of fresh meat for the sailors so large numbers of dodos were killed for food.

Later, when the Dutch used the island as a penal colony. Pigs and monkeys were brought to the island along with the convicts. Many of the ships that came to Mauritius also had uninvited rats aboard, and some found their way onto the island. Before humans and other mammals arrived, the dodo had little to fear from predators. The rats, pigs and monkeys made short work of vulnerable dodo eggs in the ground nests.

The combination of human exploitation and introduced species significantly reduced dodo populations. Within 100 years of the arrival of humans on Mauritius, the once abundant dodo was a rare bird. The last one was killed in 1681.

The Great Auk was the last flightless seabird of the Northern Hemisphere, inhabiting the boreal and low-Arctic regions of the North Atlantic. Large body size made the Great Auk especially susceptible to human overexploitation for food, fat, bait, and feathers. Ultimate extinction was caused by the collection of specimens for museums and private collectors; on Eldey Island, Iceland, in 1844, the last 2 confirmed adults were killed for European collectors.

The Laughing Owl was once common to New Zealand, but is probably now extinct. European settlers first arrived in New Zealand in 1840, when the laughing owl was plentiful. Specimens of the laughing owl were sent to the British Museum where reports on them were published in 1845.

By 1880, they were becoming rare, and the last specimen recorded was found dead at Blue Cliffs in Canterbury in 1914. There have been unconfirmed reports of laughing owls since then, but no specimens. Extinction was caused by persecution, land use changes and the introduction of predators such as cats and dogs.

Giant Moa

There were Moa living in New Zealand when the Maori people arrived but it is believed that the moa was totally extinct in 1769 when Captain Cook landed in New Zealand. Some land was cleared by the Maori, which would have reduced its habitat. But the main reason the moa became extinct was hunting.

There were 11 different species. The giant moa was one of the biggest birds ever known in the world, taller than three meters and weighing in at about 250 kilograms. However there were smaller moa. The smallest moa species was a bit bigger than a turkey, about half a meter tall. There are many other extinct New Zealand birds - rails, adzebill, wrens, eagle, etc.

The Passenger Pigeon was estimated to be numbering in the billions in the early 1800's. In 1810 the famous ornithologist Alexander Wilson described a flock that “darkened the sky” – it was several miles across and took hours to pass overhead. He calculated the size of the flock --- using the time it took to pass over, its width, and the number of birds passing over per minute – and estimated there were over two billion birds in this one flock. But by the early 1900's they were hunted (for food) to extinction by man. A monument to the passenger pigeon, in the Wisconsin's Wyalusing State Park declares: “This species became extinct through the avarice and thoughtlessness of man.” The passenger pigeon officially became extinct when the last known representative died on September 1, 1914 in the Cincinnati Zoo.

Quagga

The Quagga ( Equus quagga ) is a recently extinct mammal. Some believe that the quagga is closely related to horses and zebras. It was a yellowish-brown zebra with stripes only on its head, neck and fore body. The quagga was native to the desert areas of Africa until it was exterminated in the wild in the 1870s. The quagga went extinct because South African farmers hunted it down for meat and leather. The settlers also saw them as competitors for their livestock, mainly sheep and goats. The last captive quagga's died in Europe in the 1880s.

Tamainian Wolf

The Tasmanian wolf was found only on the southwestern side of the island of Tasmania in recent history. The fossil record shows that it was found in New Guinea and Australia as recently as 3,000 years ago. The Tasmanian Wolf was thought to be a livestock killer. This was never substantiated, but because of this misconception the wolf was hunted (by the private sector and the government) from 1840-1909 for bounty. The Tasmanian Wolf is now thought to be extinct when the last know living specimen died in a Hobart, Tasmanian zoo in 1936. The main factors leading to the demise of this species were over hunting, habitat destruction, disease, and competition with domesticated dogs.

Toolache wallabies were native to a small area in South-eastern Australia. Hunting by man was probably the main cause of extinction. They had a very beautiful pelt that was in great demand. This species was also a favorite prey for dog-hunts, because of its combination of high speed and unpredictable jumps. A second factor in the extermination of the Toolache wallaby may have been the introduction of the fox, which preyed on the young wallabies. The last member of this species may have been a captive female that survived till at least 1927.

The Heath Hen , a small wild fowl, was a relative of the prairie chicken. It was once considered quite tasty and was rather easy to kill. Prior to the American Revolution, the heath hen was found in the eastern United States from Maine to Virginia. Expanding human populations in the colonies put an intolerable hunting pressure on the heath hen populations, noticeably lowering the heath hen populations by the time of the Revolutionary War. In 1830 the heath hen's steep decline garnered the attention of naturalist John Audubon (founder of The Audubon Society), but it continued unabated. By the 1870s the only heath hens left, occupied a tiny island called Martha's Vineyard off the coast of Cape Cod in Massachusetts. In 1907 there were only 50 heath hens left on Martha's Vineyard. The following year a 1600-acre sanctuary was established for their protection.

Protection at the sanctuary seemed to be successful. The original 50 protected birds reproduced rapidly and there were 2,000 individuals by 1915. The entire heath hen population, however, was still confined to Martha's Vineyard. Then disaster struck. In 1916 a fire wiped out much of the habitat that heath hens used for breeding. The following winter was unusually harsh, and an influx of goshawks, a predatory bird that fed on the heath hens, hurt the population even more. Finally, many of the remaining heath hens fell victim to a poultry disease brought to the island by domestic turkeys. There were only 13 heath hens left by 1927 and most of these were males. The last living heath hen, the final survivor of his species, was seen on March 11, 1932.

The Jamaican Giant Galliwasp was a reptile with a length of about 30 centimeters. Its color was described as pale brown, clouded with somewhat irregular bands of a deeper tinge. It was said to occasionally change into a lively golden yellow. These lizards lived in woody and marshy districts and fed on fish and fruit. The last of the Jamaican Giant Galliwasps probably survived in the Hellshire Hills, a mongoose-free area on the island of Jamaica. The last Jamaican Giant Galliwasp was recorded in 1840. The probable cause of extinction was the introduction of mongooses by humans.

At one time, the Steller's Sea Cow was found in the cold waters of the Bering Sea, but it was hunted to extinction within 27 years of its discovery in 1741. The largest sirenian on record, the Steller's sea cow grew up to nine meters (30 feet) in length and weighed around four metric tons (approximately 4.4 tons).

To conclude this section we would like to reemphasize that extinction is still going on today as it has from the beginning when sin and death entered the world. The Bible tells us “by man came death” (1 Corinthians 15:21), and since man decided to go his own way, transgressing the commandment of God, death and pain and suffering were introduced into what was initially God's “very good” creation. We have seen from the above examples that the introduction of natural predators, the destruction of their habitat, natural disasters, disease, and primarily, hunting for food, sport or pest control was the cause of their extinction. We must therefore conclude that this is how creatures have been going extinct since sin entered the world and that death was nonexistent before man sinned.

How are fossils formed?

The current idea as to how fossils have been formed is found within many evolutionary publications. In the book “Dinosaurs” (Fog City Press 2002), edited by Dr. Paul Willis, it states, “Most fossils … result from the burial of an organism's remains in the sediments of a river, lake, or sea.”

For illustration purposes, they place a large land dwelling creature called a Camptosaurus below the surface of a lake safe from large scavengers.

Next we are told, the flesh decays leaving the bones, then “Over a long period of time, layers of sand or silt accumulate over the dinosaur's bones.” The belief is that the bones will lie on the bottom of the lake for a “long period of time” slowly accumulating layers of silt before it is finally covered and then fossilized.

This process is what Evolutionists call Uniformitarianism whereby they believe that layers of silt and sand are laid down slowly and uniformly over long periods of time covering all the creatures that have died. Encyclopedia Britannica states, “the principle of uniformity postulates that phenomena displayed in the rocks may be entirely accounted for by geologic processes which continue to operate at the present day—in other words, the present is the key to the past.”

Since we do not see great layers of strata being formed rapidly today, evolutionists theorize that the great layers of fossil bearing rock (up to 15 miles deep in some places) that are observed in the earth today (such as in the Grand Canyon) must have been laid down over millions of years.

But, if the theory proposed in the book “Dinosaurs” is true, should we not be able to see creatures on the bottoms of lakes and rivers today waiting to get covered with silt over long periods of time? This we do not see! Even under water, there are small microbes and other creatures that will eat away at the bones. As well, water contains oxygen that promotes decay.

Unless the creatures are rapidly covered with sediment, natural decay or a welcome meal for all kinds of hungry creatures would be the resulting “natural process” affecting any creatures left open to the elements.

When the Titanic sank in 1912 over 1000 bodies were not recovered. When the Titanic was found and explored after 70 years, the expedition failed to produce one bone from any of the deceased. They all disintegrated with no remains to be found other than the boots and other accessories of their owners.

In the “Royal Tyrell Museum” in Alberta Canada, they have a display representing their theory as to how fish are fossilized. They state,

“When they died, they sank to the bottom where they were buried in the mud.”

We would like to point out, that in reality this does not happen. If you have ever been out fishing perhaps you have seen a dead fish. Did you see it on the bottom? Of course not, dead fish usually float! And how long after that did it take before a pelican or seagull came along and had a free meal?

By chance, if the fish did sink, would he lay on the bottom of the lake for millions of years waiting to be covered with mud? Of course not! There are scavengers such as crabs and crayfish and other bottom feeders along with micro organisms that would make short work of cleaning up any debris left on the bottom.

How then are fossils formed and preserved? It is interesting that Evolutionists place “most fossils” under some watery deluge in order to preserve their remains, but unless they are buried RAPIDLY to trap out all oxygen and scavengers that would eat away at the bones, there is no chance of ever forming a fossil.

If the majority of evolutionists are in agreement that “most fossils” were made when they were laid down in some watery deluge, why will they not accept the possibility that the fossil beds all over the world are perhaps the result of sediments that were rapidly precipitated during one great worldwide catastrophic flood (Noah's Flood)? Well, in these last days, the Bible, even among the religious has been set aside and not seriously read or believed.

Paul said in the last days men would have “a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof” (2Timothy 3:5). They would become apostate denying the supernatural aspects of Creation, of miracles, the virgin birth, and the worldwide flood.

If we would turn the question around and ask, if the flood of Noah were true, what do you think would be the result of such a worldwide upheaval, and what would be the evidence that we might see left behind in the earth today?

Should we not find billions of dead things laid down in rock layers all over the earth? The fact is that the fossils' very existence requires rapid, permanent burial of any organism before decay and scavengers can destroy them. We believe that the strata seen in rock layers all over the earth are not the result of millions of years of uniform deposition, but rather, the resulting sedimentary layers that precipitated out of the floodwaters of Noah.

Judgment of the Wicked

God had pronounced judgment on the world of the ungodly. “God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually … The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth” (Genesis 6:5, 10-12).

The only solution for the survival of mankind was to “destroy them with the earth” (v. 13) and start over. There was yet one family remaining whom Satan had not corrupted, that was Noah and his family. “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith” (Hebrews 11:7).

“And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them” (v. 7). And God said “behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die” (v. 17).

This was no local flood for “all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark” (Genesis 7:19-23).

This was a catastrophe that was greater than any person today could possibly imagine, for a great upheaval of that magnitude was never again repeated in history. God said “neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth” (Genesis 9:11). This proves the flood of Noah was not just a local flood for there have been many local floods since that time. And God set the rainbow in the sky as a reminder of His promise that the waters should never cover the whole face of the earth again.

“Fear ye not me? saith the LORD: will ye not tremble at my presence, which have placed the sand for the bound of the sea by a perpetual decree, that it cannot pass it: and though the waves thereof toss themselves, yet can they not prevail; though they roar, yet can they not pass over it?” (Jeremiah 5:22) “He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end” (Job 26:10).

After Noah's family (eight persons) and two of every creature (even the dinosaurs) were safely in the ark, then “were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened” (Genesis 7:11). Isaiah looking back said, “for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake. The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly” (Isaiah 24:18-19).

The great slurry of hydraulic and geologic activity covered all the high hills under the whole of heaven and every living thing that was on the dry land died. Peter said, “the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished” (2Peter 3:6), and Jesus confirmed this saying “the flood came, and destroyed them all” (Luke 17:27, Matthew 24:39).

Undoubtedly this would have caused great upheavals and much sedimentary deposition reconfiguring the face of the earth from any likeness it had before the flood. Peter described it as “the world that then was”. It “then was” but no longer exists. The Psalmist said when the floodwaters arose, the mountains did “shake” and were “carried into the midst of the seas” (Psalm 46:2-3). Job said that the waters “overturned the earth” (Job 12:15).

Where did the Water Go?

Some have questioned the possibility of a worldwide flood by asking, where then did all the water go? That's a good question and surely needs to be answered, but first of all we should ask, where did all the water come from? The Bible indicates that the flood had two sources, the great water cisterns of the deep and the atmosphere above.

In the beginning, on day one of the creation week, God created the heavens and the earth (time, space and matter), and the earth was without form and void. The earth at this time consisted of the elements and water (building blocks)(Genesis 1:2). Then on day two God divided the waters and made a space or an expanse between the waters above and the waters below (Genesis 1:6-8). On day three God caused dry land to appear out of the waters beneath the atmosphere and He called the dry land Earth (Genesis 1:9-13).

Before the flood then, there was a great body of water above the atmosphere. Now if all this water was precipitated from above the atmosphere during the great flood, where is that water today? The Bible tells us the waters are primarily now in the oceans which are up to 6 miles deep. The surface area of the world today consists of 70% water, and if the mountains were pushed into the oceans, it is not hard to see how this world could be covered in as much as 2 miles of water.

“Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever. Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away. They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them . Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth” (Psalm 104:5-9).

When we look at the strata in the mountains today, (which are full of fossils), they have the appearance of being uplifted with the lines of strata presented at vertical angles. It is not hard to imagine when the mountains were lifted up, the water runoff would have caused great valleys and canyons to be cut out all over the earth revealing the strata that was precipitated out of the floodwaters of Noah along with all the creatures buried therein. Where canyons are cut out, the layers of strata tend to be in a more horizontal arrangement such as in the Grand Canyon.

The evolutionary hypothesis as to how canyons are cut denies the Biblical account of a young earth. Evolutionists have determined that not only were the layers laid down over long ages, but that the canyons were also cut out by slow meandering rivers over millions of years.

When an evolutionist looks at these amazing pictures he is trained to think in the order of millions of years. But when a Bible believing Christian looks at the same pictures he sees the result of God's judgment that quickly overcame the world of the ungodly.

How then, do evolutionists come up with millions of years?

If you have ever been to a rock and fossil shop, you will find dates affixed to their fossils in the millions of years. But is this true? The Bible tells us to “prove all things”. Can they prove these great ages? According to Biblical chronology, the earth is only around 6000 years old. If you ask the owners of the fossil shops how they got these dates, the answer you are most certain to get is “carbon dating”.
Here is a brief summary on how Carbon Dating works:

This method measures the ratio of C-14 and C-12 in a creature after it has died.
C-12 is stable and does not decay but C-14 decays into N-14.
C-14 is constantly being produced and constantly decaying in the atmosphere.
Living creatures take in Carbon in the form of C-14 and C-12 by breathing and by eating.
When a creature dies, it no longer takes in any Carbon.
Half of the amount of C-14 decays in 5730 years. In another 5730 years, half of the balance is depleted and so on until there is no C-14 left.
At this rate of decay, it is obvious that within about 10 half lives there will be no C-14 left.

From the above data, it can be clearly seen that this method cannot date anything more than about 50-60,000 years. It should also be noted that this method cannot be used to date rocks because rocks do not take in carbon (C-12 & C-14). Furthermore, when this method is used, it is assumed that the C-14 and C-12 in the atmosphere are now in equilibrium, that is, the ratio of C-12 to C-14 is not changing and is now stable.

Therefore, when a creature takes in carbon in the form of C-12 and C-14, the ratio of C-12 and C-14 within the creature would be the same ratio as the atmosphere when it dies. But, if the ratio of C-12 to C-14 has not yet reached equilibrium, creatures that died a thousand years ago would have a different ratio when they died compared with creatures that died today throwing off the reliability of this method.

Dr. William Libby, the inventor of Carbon-14 dating, assumed that the ratios of C-14 and C-12 in the atmosphere were in equilibrium. He realized that for the test to work these needed to be in equilibrium. But “He found a considerable discrepancy in his measurements indicating that, apparently, radiocarbon was being created in the atmosphere somewhere around 25 percent faster than it was becoming extinct. Since this result was inexplicable by any conventional scientific means, Libby put the discrepancy down to experimental error.” (Richard Milton, Shattering the myths of Darwinism, 1997. 0. 32, W.F. Libby. Radiocarbon Dating. 1955.)

But were these alleged discrepancies due to error? It was admitted that “for the test to work properly: the standard mix of radiocarbon to ordinary carbon in the terrestrial reservoir must always have been the same” (Richard Milton, Shattering the Myths of Darwinism . 1997, pg. 31), but to the contrary, it was found that C-14 was still building up in the atmosphere faster than it was decaying.

“During the 1960's, Libby's experiments were repeated by chemists… The new experiments, though, revealed that the discrepancy observed by Libby was not merely an experimental error—it did exist.” (Richard Milton, Shattering the Myths of Darwinism. 1997, pg. 31)

“There is strong indication, despite the large errors, that the present natural production rate exceeds the natural decay rate by as much as 25%” (Lingenfelter, Richard E., “Production of Carbon-14 by Cosmic Ray Neutrons,” Reviews of Geophysics , vol. 1, no. 1 (February 1963), p. 51.)

“The reliability of the carbon-14 dating method is dependent on a balance (steady state) between the amount of C-14 being produced in the atmosphere and the amount of C-14 decay over a period of time. This balance has been shown to be FALSE.” (Mike Riddle. Carbon Dating)

Evolutionists assume that the production and decay rate of C-14 is in equilibrium because they believe the earth is billions of years old. Equilibrium would have been achieved after only 60,000 years. But, if in fact, the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere were still building up faster than it is decaying, it would indicate that the earth's atmosphere is not even 60,000 years old because equilibrium has not yet been achieved. What had initially been set out to prove an old earth, resulted in just the opposite. “Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee” (Psalms 76:10).

Another assumption that is used is that the C-12 has been the same in the atmosphere for long ages. What they have failed to take into consideration is the influx of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere with the industrial revolution, atomic weapons testing, and the eruption of volcanoes, all of which would dump tons of C-12 into the atmosphere.

For more information on carbon dating see: MYTHS REGARDING RADIOCARBON DATING

How about Dating the Rocks?

The common perception today is that the earth is 4.6 billion years old and that radioisotope dating is the method that gives us these great ages. But again, we would have to ask, are there any assumptions used in these dating methods as we have found in the Carbon Dating Method?

There are several of these methods that operate by measuring the parent and daughter isotopes. In this method (as well as all others), the unstable parent isotope (which has a given half life) decays into the stable daughter isotope and the ratio of the two is used to determine the age. This is known as radioactive decay. Uranium-Lead, Potassium-Argon, and Strontium-Rubidium are but a few of these dating methods, but Potassium-Argon is by far the most common.

The theory behind this method begins when lava cools forming an igneous rock. This is when the radiometric “clock” starts. When the lava is in a molten state it can readily give off argon gas. But when it cools off, no more argon can be dissipated and the argon begins to build up within the rock as the potassium decays. It is alleged that half of the Potassium will decay into Argon in 130 million years. By measuring the ratio of Potassium/Argon in the rock we should be able to calculate the age of the rock from the time when the lava crystallized.

In theory this all sounds quite plausible, but what we find upon examination of this dating method is that several assumptions are taken rendering this radioisotope method unreliable and therefore invalid as well as all others that operate on the same basis. Here are a few of the assumptions that are taken for granted.

It is assumed that the argon (daughter isotope) level is zero when the rock is formed.
The number of parent/daughter atoms has not been altered during the life of the rock except by radioactive decay.
The decay rate has always been constant.

These three pieces of information are not known when dating rocks. Furthermore, we will find out that the assumptions taken are usually based on the worldview that the earth is billions of years old.

“Several methods have been devised for estimating the age of the earth and its layers of rocks. These methods rely heavily on the assumption of uniformitarianism, i.e., natural processes have proceeded at relatively constant rates throughout the earth's history.” “It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be. Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years). There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological 'clock.'” (Stansfield, William D., The Science of Evolution (New York: Macmillan, 1977), pp. 80-81).

Furthermore, these methods have been proven absolutely fallible when rocks of a known age have been dated using these methods. Tests have been done on the rocks of volcano's that we know have recently erupted and they have been given dates that are astronomically inconsistent with the absolute date.

Sunset Crater in Northern Arizona was formed in 1065AD: Dated 200,000 + years
Lava flows at Mt. Ngaurhoe in New Zealand were formed in 1949, 1954, & 1975: Dated at 275,000 years
Hualalai basalt in Hawaii was formed in 1801: Dated 1.4-22 million years old
Mt. Etna basalt in Sicily was formed in 1972: Dated 140,000 – 350,000
Mt St. Helens erupted in 1980: Dated 300,000 years old
Diamonds from Zaire: Dated at 6 billion years old (Note: earth is supposedly only 4.6 billion years old)

Even among evolutionists there is the recognition that these radiometric dating methods are all unreliable. Consider the following quotes:

“If all of the age-dating methods (rubidium-strontium, uranium-lead and potassium-argon) had yielded the same ages, the picture would be neat. But they haven't.” (Driscoll, Everly, “Dating of Moon Samples: Pitfalls and Paradoxes,” Science News , vol. 101 (January 1, 1972), pp. 12-14.)

“In conventional interpretation of K-Ar age data, it is common to discard ages which are substantially too high or too low compared with the rest of the group or with other available data such as the geological time scale. The discrepancies between the rejected and the accepted are arbitrarily attributed to excess or loss of argon.” (Hayatsu, A., “K-Ar Isochron Age of the North Mountain Basalt, Nova Scotia,” Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences , vol. 16 (April 1979), p. 974.)

“In general, dates in the 'correct ball park' are assumed to be correct and are published, but those in disagreement with other data are seldom published nor are discrepancies fully explained.” (R.L. Mauger)

“The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radio decay rates of uranium and thorium. Such 'confirmation' may be short-lived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily. There has been in recent years the horrible realization that radio decay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences. And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events which brought the Mesozoic to a close may not be 65 million years ago but, rather, within the age of memory of man.” (Frederic B. Jueneman “Secular Catastrophism”. Industrial Research and Development. June 1982. p. 21.)

“Then as now, peer review can represent the tyranny of the majority. I have run the peer-review gauntlet perhaps a hundred times. My papers describing and interpreting geology in more or less conventional terms progressed smoothly, whereas publication of my manuscripts challenging accepted concepts has often been impeded, and occasionally blocked.” (W. B. Hamilton, “Archean Tectonics and Magmatism”, International Geology Review , 1998, p. 3.)

One more note the reader should be aware of is that fossils are not found in volcanic (igneous) rock, they are found in sedimentary rock, which the radioisotope methods cannot date. If carbon dating cannot be used to date the rocks and other radioisotope methods cannot be used to date the fossils, how then do evolutionists date the rocks? Here is where the Geologic Column comes into view.

The Geologic Column

Before dating techniques were created, the belief that the earth was millions of years old was already introduced. This thought was based on the philosophy of Uniformitarianism, which was first proposed by James Hutton when he presented his uniformitarian principle in his papers to the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1785. He stating that the rock layers observed all around the earth were laid down slowly over long periods of time. The lower layers of rock were then thought to be hundreds of millions of years older than the upper layers.

This uniformitarian philosophy afterward gave rise to Darwinian Evolution when Charles Darwin extended the principle of uniformity to the plant and animal kingdoms. This proposal was then illustrated in the Geologic Column, also known as the Geologic Time Scale .

When the artists created the Geologic Time Scale, it gave the appearance of evolution happening over geologic time, with marine invertebrates on the bottom working their way up to man at the top. But when one looks at the finer details, the true picture represented is that of distinct kinds, some that are extinct and some that are living today. Any changes we may see are always on a horizontal level within a kind (example: many varieties of cats), or on a downward level due to mutations and extinctions (contrary to evolutions upward demands).

Within the rock layers are found fossils, and it is “believed” that some of these fossils were very early forms of life that became extinct a long time ago. The fossils found in these layers then became the means of determining the age of the rocks. Likewise, the rocks were then used to date the fossils.

Opponents of this philosophy insist that this is circular reasoning and no scientific method at all, but in all reality is what evolutionary scientists choose to “believe”.

“The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks” (J.E. O'Rourke, "American Journal of Science," 1976, 276:51).

The World Book Encyclopedia (1978) in its article titled “Fossils” states,

“Scientists determine when fossils were formed by finding out the ages of the rocks in which they lie.”

But the same encyclopedia, under its heading “Paleontology” says,

“The age of the rocks may be determined by the fossils found in them.”

This circular reasoning is also presented in museums abroad such as The Museum of Geology in Rapid City, South Dakota.

Sadly, many point to the Geologic Column as the final proof of Evolution. Dr. Henry Morris of ICR points out, “It is not uncommon under this system to find many rock systems “out-of-place” in the column—that is, “old” rocks overlying “young” rocks, fossils from different “ages” together, entire ages missing, etc. When such anomalies are encountered, imaginary earth movements or other geologic phenomena must be postulated to account for them. All of this creative thinking is necessary under the false assumption that the evolutionary ages of geologic history really existed at all.”

For more information see:
DOES THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN PROVE EVOLUTION?
TEN MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN

Conclusion

The Devil has been “a liar” from the beginning; in fact, he is called “the father” (John 8:44) of lies. He is “more subtle” (Genesis 3:1) than any creature, and from the beginning till this present time he has tempted man saying, “Yea, hath God said” (Genesis 3:1)? In his bag of lies he has Evolution, which he is using to deceive many, turning their hearts from the truth of Gods Word.

The Devil, we are told, “decieveth the whole world” (Revelation 12:9), and he has many agents who are “deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13).

But Jesus solemnly warned us, “Take heed that ye be not deceived” (Luke 21:8)... “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” (1 Peter 5:8) ... “Prove all things” (1Thessalonians 5:21)... “Be ready always to give an answer to every man” (1Peter 3:15)... “Know how ye ought to answer every man” (Colossians 4:6)… “And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed” (Romans 13:11).

If we look back to our original question, “Does the fossil record prove evolution?” We must respond with a firm No! The fossil record was formed primarily during the Great Flood (Genesis 6-9), when “the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished” (2Peter 3:6). When we look at the fossil record, we should be reminded of the awfulness of sin, and the holiness of God who judged man's rebellion. We should understand that “by one man [Adam] sin entered the world, and death by sin.”

Death entered the world by sin! But to the contrary, the theory of Evolution starts with dead matter, and through Evolution life came to be. However, in our present day we see no dead matter coming to life. Today the real observable evidence is that life comes from Life and ultimately, we MUST declare that all things come from the Living God.

In the beginning God had created all things in six 24-hour days and on the seventh day He rested. On that day He pronounced that everything was “very good”. Therefore, the sin, suffering, and death that we see today are intruders and not an initial part of God's “very good” creation. Because of sin “the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now” (Romans 8:22).

When we see sedimentary rocks containing billions of dead plants, animals and people, we must conclude that these things happened sometime after the creation week.

But God is not going to allow these intruders to continue forever. Death, sin and suffering will eventually be banished when He makes the new heavens and earth (Revelation 21:1-5). The whole Creation shall one day “be delivered from the bondage of corruption” (Romans 8:21).

If we believe God's account of Creation, there is no way that millions of years can fit into the equation. The Bible demands a young earth, but some have compromised with Evolution suggesting that each day of Creation could represent millions of years (“Day Age” theory). But, there is no evidence in context of Genesis chapter one that the word “day” means anything but a literal solar day.

The Hebrew word ( yom ) that is translated “day” is specifically defined by God as the daylight period in the sequence of day and night the very first time it is used (Genesis 1:5). God Himself unequivocally confirmed in the fourth Commandment (Exodus 31:18) that He had made everything in heaven and earth in six days—days that were the same kind of days as man's days.

Furthermore, the Lord Jesus Christ clearly affirmed in Mark 10:6 that “from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female”, not 4.6 billion years after the beginning of the Creation! The very concept of billions of years of a groaning and travailing creation (Romans 8:22) with animals suffering and dying during the long geologic ages before God could get around to creating man in His own image, is an insult to a loving, omniscient, omnipotent God. Death, under such a concept, is not “the wages of sin” as the Bible says (Romans 6:23), but the method of “creation”, as evolutionists claim, through Natural Selection and the Survival of the Fittest.

Death (separation from God) is the payment for sin. But God our Creator is love, and He provided the payment for sin with the sacrifice of His Son. Because mankind is infected with sin, He desires to save us and mold us anew. We are like a blemished vessel in the potter's hand. “And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it” (Jeremiah 18:4).

Jesus described salvation like this, saying, “Ye must be born again” (John 3:7). He clarified this by saying, “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:14-18).

Peter explained it like this, “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you” (1Peter 1:23-25).

Ever since sin entered the world, man has been born of corruptible seed, infected with sin. As the grass, we soon wither away. Like the whole creation, we are under the bondage of decay. As Paul reminded us, “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). But Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners and has redeemed us, “not with corruptible things, as silver and gold … But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot … Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God” (1Peter 1:18-19, 21).

Only in this way can we be reconciled with God when we repent and believe that “Christ died for our sins … and that he rose again” (1Corinthians 15:1-4). When man, by faith, looks to Christ on Calvary's cross, believing on HIM, he is placed “in Christ”. HIS death becomes our death, so too, HIS Life becomes ours. This is good news for mankind. This is the “gospel”.

From this time, the Spirit of Christ indwells the believer and begins His work from within, transforming the new believer into the “same image” (2 Corinthians 3:18) of Christ. “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (2 Corinthians 5:17).

The Lord Jesus Christ “gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and to purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (Titus 2:14). We are now “his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Ephesians 2:10). We ought then to “put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness” (Ephesians 4:22-24).

But, if we receive not the gift of God's beloved Son, and “sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” (Hebrews 10:26-29)

“How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation …” (Hebrews 2:3)?

Last Update : 6/26/2007

Evolution

Renee

Enlightenment, USA

4renee@prodigy.net

June 7, 2005 3:46 AM

Once again I am dumbfounded by the amount of work put into the argument against evolution. The fear that science will somehow obliterate religion is so pervasive among Creationists that one begins to wonder at what point truth became a lesser priority.

Evolution is never wholly, or even partly, understood correctly by any Creationist I have ever met, heard, read. Not once have I heard or seen it defined or discussed with any accuracy. Of course, that is the nature of the delusion.

Evolution is not just supported by fossils. It can be observed, happening, as we speak. Get some bacteria and a petri dish. Go to the Galapagos Islands, and compare birds over several seasons of varying weather. And once and for all, realize that "theory" can indeed mean fact.

I think the most telling statement about how much those who adhere to Creationist explanations are not observing life with their eyes (mind) open is their idea that evolution - even the vague, inaccurate, misconception of it - somehow precludes God, or religion. Therein lies perhaps the biggest misunderstanding.

Unfortunately, Creationists are so enmeshed in supporting an imposed patriarchal Catholic papalcy imposed belief (above their own ability to think critically) that they have forgotten how to inquire, ponder ideas, concepts, that just may include their God and evolution all in the same instant.

I have heard it said that God exists whether you believe in her or not. Similarly, evolution exists whether you believe in it or not. It won't go away by ignoring it, or trying to forbid education about it, or arguing in stubborn ignorance that it is not well-supported by fact. All such arguments are specious and based in a very basic fear of, well, enlightened thinking.

If only Creationists could step put of their fear, and rightousness, for just a moment, they just may figure out that spirituality and evolution are living, co-existing, together on this planet, no matter how hard they choose to deny, and ignore it. It is sad to observe.

As a teacher of grade school and college students, I am grateful that I have the opportunity to help hundreds of children learn how to think cirtically for themselves, especially when fear and bias are proferred in the name of religion, or worse yet, God.

Here here!

Carol

California

xy_squared@yahoo.com

July 29, 2005 12:44 AM

I fully support the critique of outdated 'scientific' ideas. Many wonderful things have been discovered by careful argument and contemplation of facts, upsetting earlier ideas. The earth is round, not flat. Differences in skin color have nothing to do with your personality. Flies to not pop out of dead meat fully formed. In science, things change, and new data comes to the fore.

Science works by taking in the data, and then thinking of a reason why the data is what it is. Then, other scientists go over your idea (your theory) and test it to see if it works. They show their own theories, changes, and additions, and, by mutual effort, a theory emerges which fits all the data and is not contested (at least not until the next bit of data comes out). Because this is dynamic, even long-held ideas are still called 'theories.' That is normal scientific proccess.

However, science is, most emphatically, NOT the creation of an idea, and the search for data to fit that idea. For example, John Doe says that men are better than women. He goes and collects examples of lots of great men through history, and says that he finds no evidence that women are great. This is rediculous. John Doe has simply ignored the Data that doesn't support his theory. He is not being scientific.

If you really want to contest the long-held theory of Evolution, while keeping scientific credibility (which you are obviously trying to do), then please start over, with ALL the facts, and decide what would best fit them.

There ARE transitionary stages in the fossil record. Homo habilis is widely accepted as a transitionary stage in human evolution. Archeopteryx, Microraptor, and other feathered dinosaurs are transitionary stages in bird evolution. Mesohippus is a transitionary stage in horse evolution. Etc. Also, note that, in the geologic scale, the word 'sudden' means 'in a few million years.'

Fossils can be covered by sediment quickely. Ancient mudslides, volcanic eruptions, and tar pits are the best sources of fossils. Also, in highly acidic environments, like in peat bogs, decay happens very slowly. Fossils can form there as well.
Also, I would like to know how the Great Flood managed to deposit fossils on ALL layers of rock in a 40-day period?

Evolution can be observed withing historic time. Look at domestication, which is, at its core, human-caused evolution. Wolf becomes dog. Aurochs becomes cow. Red Jungle Fowl becomes chicken. Even recently, foxes, rats, and fruit flies have been artificially selected into highly varied forms. If people can do it, why can't nature? For that matter, why can't God?

Is evolution really contrary to a beleif in God? No. It is only contrary to an exact, literal intrerpretation of the Bible. Trying to collect data to support a theory is not scientific. It is religious. I respect that, but, like America's founders, I do not think that they should mix.

Great Article!

Jay Lucas

Missouri

unclescrappy2002@yahoo.com

September 22, 2005 10:28 PM

Well done.

Interesting interpretation

Michael

Arizona

notreally@interested.com

January 17, 2006 2:41 PM

Showing like animals / plants side by side is not science nor religion "shoring-up".

The author didn't show any human or sapien remains / fossils. That would contradict his slide show.

And there are plenty of plant and animal fossils that show subtle changes that you can't refute. These examples on the surface look very much alike. But the skeletal differences are key.

Ordinarily I'd have passed this site by. The author went through so much trouble in a non-logical way, that I was self-implored to comment.

I say, believe what you like, just don't cast judgement. Because as you well know in your heart of hearts, judgement can only be made be the big guy.

If I want to believe in evolution, great. You, religion, great!

I'm all for leaving politics out of how we got here. Live and let live.

Well Put

Aaron

Kewaunee Wisconsin

guppy_petey@hotmail.com

February 27, 2006 10:55 PM

Wow, have never seen such convincing data for creation. The evidence is irrefutable, and some people, ^, still refuse to grasp the light...
God Bless your work

I ponder...

Jeremy

North Carolina

sgt.invincible@gmail.com

March 24, 2006 9:09 PM

I have to admit that I am impressed with the article. It is sincere, and I have to say that I find that lacking in both the evolution and the creation camps.

I suppose in the end, I agree with what the above poster said about the mixing of God and science. I have spent a great deal of my life hearing both sides, (My father was a baptist deacon, my mother was a biologist...yeah, don't ask) being torn to agree with one side or the other.

I suppose it occured to me one day, that Gods nature, wisdom and power is INFINITE. No human can claim to understand or fathom God, and in that, perhaps He (offered as gender neutral) as the ultimate creator of 'science' utililized these methods to create all we know.

I remember as a child my Grandmother telling me that to God, 1000 years is but a twinkle of an eye. Why then, in that all encompassing twinkle could God not have used 'science' to create the world? Why is it that God has to be this old man with a beard sitting on a cloud that can wrinkle his nose and 'blink' things into existence. It is much more interesting to me that, God would utilize the mysteries of the very fabric of reality, that he himself created, to enact his will.

Regardless, we as human beings will question those mysteries, nay, we MUST question those mysteries. I feel that as we do so we must remember that just as Scientists are fallible, that those who came before us in various religious movements were too, simply, Human. Just as science can be skewed towards personal bias, so too, can religion, and I feel that both scientists and theologians can too easily become wrapped up in their own self-righteousness. We must remember that there is, and will always be things we do not know, and by that admission, perhaps we can grow spiritually, and intellectually.

Good article, yes, but it's flawed.

Private

July 10, 2006 7:35 AM

I'll have to admit-- AWESOME article. However, your theory has a few... flaws. First of all ,you claim that Evolution was "influenced by the devil" and "made by men that renounce God". The second one, renouncing God, is true. I myself firmly believe in most parts of evoluion, and I am an athiest. As for the first... I don't think so. How can you even prove the devil exists? Or God for that matter? (And don't cite the Bible as proof, please. It's been edited countless times and is contradictory even in the same Testament. Not to mention, how will you prove just because it's the Bible it's true? Oh, PLEASE realise I am not trying to offend any religious people here, just expressing my personal opinion and trying to back it up.) And as to the devil point, please. I believe in Evolution, as I have stated, and trust me, I have not seen Lucifer or the devil or whatever other names that character has.

Your spieces that haven't changed one iota are a few out of a great great many. It's understandable that Evolution, being a random process, will miss some species eventually.

As to your "Evolution=Universe came from Big Bang" argument, realize as wel lthat one need not labbel themselves. I believe in MOSt parts of evolution. Big Bang isn't one of them. (I am agnostic in that regard.)

I am sorry, however, that at this time I do not have time to write any further argument or critisism.

At any rate, good article.

-Anonymous and Random Person

More crazy talk!

G-man

Reality

July 10, 2006 7:37 AM

These tired old arguments continue to illustrate the lack of good science education in this country. Creation is a quaint religious story written thousands of years ago to explain how we got here. Since then we have learned a lot more about the universe we live in and have come up with logical explanations for many things from the Big Bang to how viruses genetically mutate from year to year. Not to mention the numerous "new" fossilized species discovered every year. It's all evolution!

Common Sense

Kevin

Ohio

July 10, 2006 7:38 AM

What is missing from the slide show of pictures are any mammals or birds. Why aren't there any of those families in the listing of extinct-but-not-really creatures?

Another problem I have is that the presenter only briefly touches on human destruction of the environment. If God is watching the Earth right now, he/she is NOT happy with the way the neoconservatives are thrashing our environment into the ground.

Finally, I believe that God exists just as much as evolution. Even if we go all the way back to the Big Bang, and look at the evidence, we have begun to prove that it is not a universe continually collapsing and expanding...something must have started it off.

And whoever was smart enough to blow up something as large as the Universe is wise enough to do whatever he wants, including free will. Because plain and simple evolution is free will, and nobody, not even God, can take that away from you.

Great Article!

Scott

Canada

swthiel@yahoo.ca

July 10, 2006 7:39 AM

It is clear Noel that you have very little understanding of evolution. You are talking jibberish and making false claims here. For example - you ask "Why don't current living species change/evolve"? The answer is that they will if required or go extinct. If you visited earth 65 million years ago you would have seen a T-REX - a species that hadn't changed in over 2 million years since 67/68 million BC. It was unable to adapt and went extinct. Just one example of many. How about a Trilobite - unchanged for well over 300 million years - then it went extinct - or a Condylarth that went unchanged for millions of years - BUT evolved into hoofed mammals - it did change! Stop quoting the bible - nobody knows who wrote it.

Great Article!

Jessica

Canada

i_love_kiwiis@hotmail.com

July 10, 2006 7:40 AM

This is Noel's daughter, Might I ask you the question of WHY my dad should stop quoting the bible?, Is it maybe because" It might be TRUE" according to the bible all of what it says is TRUE for example It says - Israel will become a nation again = It happened , and just look how small Israel LOOKS, BUT they have GOD with them, that is why they won so many fights and wars against Egypt, Syria, and the other Arab nations. One attack Israel had very few men and Pitchforks and shovels, And the attacking nations had Tanks, Guns and the works of army supplies, and what happened the attacking nation turned around because they thought that Israel was coming with a bigger army. And If GOD wasn't with Israel wouldn't Israel be Wiped off the face of earth? BUT they are still there in the middle of nations that hate them. There is sooo many other things in the Bible that say what is going to happen in the last days and I'm afraid WE are in the last days! The Bible was Written by men !
Inspired by God( written by men who were disciples of God) .
All I know is that I did not evolve, Especially not from Hairy apes and monkeys and what ever we "EVOLVED" from. I think that's jibberish.
Christians won many fights against Evolutionists proving it wrong and wrong again.
And I have another question if we evolved from Monkeys why aren't we still evolving? Why can't monkeys Build bridges, Fly airplanes, make computers ect...?? God created All animals and God created man in his OWN image. In the bible it talks about the Global flood, Some people think that the grand Canyon for instance, took Millions of years to form but if there was a global flood and the water rushed down there couldn't that cut out the grand canyon? Geologist Dr. S. Austin spent years studying the grand Canyon. He has found evidence in the support of the Theory that the Canyon was formed by the breaking of great natural dams that held back enormous lakes, Creationists believe that water trapped by these dams soon after Noah's flood, formed the Grand Canyon. Their waters cut through the sedimentary layers believed to have been laid down by Noah's flood. If these lakes did exist they would have covered a large portion of the "Colorado Plateau" High Flat land areas of Utah, !
Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico. The lakes could have easily covered 30,000 sq. miles and contained 3,000 cubic miles of water. A hurricane, normal flood, or tidal wave, or Tsunami can do more in an hour or a day that the ordinary process of nature can do in a thousand years. Can you imagine that the flood waters of these lakes would do?....

Great Article!

Jessica

July 10, 2006 7:42 AM

.... And when that global flood occurred and the animals that weren't on the ark drowned and sand and mud covered them, Could that be why there is fossils? We found fossils of what appears to be a Yard or longer Nautaloid on the Shores of a lake in the middle of Canada where Nautaloids DO NOT live. How would they get way up here sooo far from the ocean??
There are Ancient stories told by the people of Hawaii, China, Babylonia, and Toltec Indians in Mexico and there story is that the first world lasted 1,716 years and was destroyed by a great flood that covered even the highest mountains, their story tells of a few men who escaped in a " toptipetlocali' which means Closed chest. and when the flood was over these men and women began to multiply and built a very high "zacuali" or a great tower, Then how ever the languages got confused, so different language groups wandered to other parts of the earth. God told Noah and his Family to spread out on the earth but they DID NOT, So by confusing the languages it caused the people to spread out on the earth and gave us all the languages.
The word dinosaur means terrible Lizard, So could they just have lived longer and grew bigger?

Nobody could have visited the earth 65 Million Years Ago, because the earth isn't that old.

What is and what makes you so sure that a Condylarth evolved into a hoofed animal? Is there any Proof as in Fossils of this "EVOLVED" mammal??
I hope I didn't take up to much of your time if you read this, And I hope I didn't offend you in any way.

nameless

July 13, 2006 6:19 PM

It is shocking and appalling that there are so many people who continue to think in such a narrow minded way. Respecting what your father believes is commendable, but to take it as it is without critically thinking about what is being said is irresponsible. As previous commentors have said, THINK, use your own mind, look at ALL the facts and not just the data that will support or refute what you believe or don't believe.

Great Article!

Brendan

Califonia

Notfunny11@aol.com

July 18, 2006 2:40 AM

Hello, I don’t want to get into all the topics addressed. I love this link and I think it provides many important facts about things that are hard to find ANYWHERE. I just have one thing I would like to talk about. On the topic of the Coelacanth not having any physical evidence of its link from fish to amphibian. Do you think it is at all possible that the links were made of cartilage? Many Amphibians are made of cartilage and their skeletons are not easy to preserve, and many fish are made out of similar materials which decompose quickly. I feel this may be the reason for the link between Coelacanth and amphibians to be so hard to prove. If you look at the facts you will see that the Coelacanth has shoulders which no other fish has, you will find that they look like no other fish in the sea, and the very fact that we as humans believe them to no longer exists backs up my point, in that, we don’t know anything about anything, including where we came from. The Coelacanth, to me, seems like a very good possibility, although I do not like the idea of being created from some fish, I can accept it as a possibility, and suggested you try to open your mind as well to different possibilities.

rubbish

prince william

July 28, 2006 8:21 PM

dear noel and daughter,
do you honestly believe the entire world was flooded by a storm lasting 40 days that was initiated by the will of god?? read that sentence twice and then i want you to think about how ridiculous that sounds. you need to take a college level biology course and pay extra attention in the genetics and evolution section of the course. It will show you how irrational your thinking is. face it man science is killing god. people dont need to use god as a means to explain natrual phenomena anymore. we know why lighting occurs...its not zeus, as various fields of science make more and more discoveries there are less and less things we dont understand, this means there are less and less things we have to explain away by utilizing god. evolution is just one such example.

Big Bang Believable?

Noel

Canada

noel@accordingtothescriptures.org

July 29, 2006 8:21 AM

Prince William,
You ask me if the entire world was judged in a mountain covering flood by the will of God as if it is unbelieveable? I would have to ask, once again, if this were true, what evidence would we see in the earth today? Would we not find billions of dead things laid down in sedimentary strata around the world. This is exactly what we see around the globe today. But now, I have a question for you. You believe in the Big Bang, that is, a great explosion 4.5 billion years ago (this varies depending on what sect you subscibe to) created us. This is not only irrational, it is absurd. Explosions have never been observed to created anything, rather, they destroy. The Big Bang theorists propose that the temperature in the first second of the Bang was 10 to the 19th power GeV (1 gigaelectron volt = 45,940,000,000,000,000 degrees F). Without trying to ridicule the scientific mind, we must reason that if an autoclave will destroy all organisms on surgical instruments at 260 degrees F, certainly 45,940,000,000,000,000 x 10 to the 19th power degrees F would do the same. To give an idea of just how hot this is, the surface of the Sun is 12,000 degrees F, and the outer atmosphere is around 1,000,000 degrees F. The Big Bang that is alleged to be 459,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times hotter than the sun's atmosphere would certainly sterilize the whole universe and leave it void of any life. You cannot get away from the Law of Biogenesis which states, All life comes from life, ultimately the Living God! You must get back to the drawing board. Here are 100 more things to consider: http://www.modomedia.com/quantum/100things.html

Great Article!

Canada

August 9, 2006 3:06 PM

I love reading your articles! I think they are the best. Evolution is wrong because God created man in his own image. The animals were told to be fruitful and multiply and they still are what we see today. A crocodile is a crocodile and a monkey is a monkey and a human is a human. I think that they should use the bible more in school and not just take evolution and the big bang as facts because there is no evidence. The Bible however is the TRUTH and God's word was arround way before science books and evolution theory. Maybe some people just need to not try so hard to contradict the Bible. People need to give up the "scientific" facts and focus on God and his creation. Again I say this is a great article. God Bless you!

T-Rex On the Ark

Scott

Canada

falling_arrow@yahoo.com

October 7, 2006 6:22 PM

If 2 of each animal were on Noah's ark, what did the 2 T-Rex's eat for 40 days? Birdseed? What did the lions and other carnivores eat? The measurements of the ark are in the bible. If we built such an ark could it hold a T-Rex, a Brontosaurus plus all the other large animals including the giant mammals of several million years' ago? There is no contemprary evidence Jesus existed. Those Jews who believed in Christ borrowed ideas from other religions, wrote them down, persuaded others to believe as they did and over the coming centuries murdered our ancestors the Pagans and converted those who did not wish to be butchered. Example: Charlemagne beheading 4500 Pagans in 782 AD. Definition of a good Christian: One who successfully imposes his beliefs upon another without having to murder him.

Christian History

Scott

Canada

October 7, 2006 6:54 PM

It would serve the religious community well to know the origins of Christianity. Ever ask yourself - "How did Europe become Christian?" Interesting Reading.

http://www.white-history.com/hwr17.htm

Although I completely disagree with Noel at least he allows opposing points of view.

Great Article!

Fezaad

NY City

fezaad28@yahoo.com

October 9, 2006 1:08 AM

I am not a scientist, but I have learned a lot about life and want to be a scientist some day. I am 15 years old. I was raise Muslim, but I learn that their might be a possibility that god doesn’t exist. Science is something fills with logic and reasoning. There might be a god in this world and there might not be. Following science is the only reason why humans have so many things (technology) available. Humans evolved for many reason including environment changes. Ok, lets say Humans didn’t evolved and there was a god. Where would of we have gotten the food from. Is god going to give us, no it is simple our brain help us to make tools for hunting. God just didn’t give us tools, we as humans did all of this by our self. Religions and beliefs have been holing back human civilizations. Now lets say humans evolved and there was no god. How did we get our food, simple we use our brain using logic and reasonable thinking, we where able to come up with ways for hunting and it was passed on. As time passed we were able to pass on more knowledge on and today we now have more efficient tools know as technology. By taking away work tools we would basically living like our ancestors. “Knowledge is power” use it as your advantage in life. By now you’re wondering what does this entire essay have to do with Human Evolution, everything. Fossils are something that is real, but a Bible/Belief doesn’t prove any thing. Let me explain Fossils is something you can touch feel and holes evidences. Bible/Belief is like reading a storybook that is made up. It is something that is has been pass down by generations. Explanation: When your family have a religion/belief its is something that you learn from them, but will another family learn the something? No, it is just beliefs that is why there are so many different religions/belief. Now let me get Strait to the point. Humans have evolved and there have been evidences to support it (Fossils). But Regions/Belief is something like a storybook. This is what I believe religious people don’t accepts Science, because there brain have been programmed and it is too hard for them to let go. This is why we all think differently and solve problem slow/fast, just like a computer.
Email me What you think: Fezaad28@yahoo.com

T-Rex On the Ark? Yes!

Noel

Canada

noel@accordingtothescriptures.org

October 12, 2006 11:12 PM

Many have been critical about the Ark in regards to its size, and whether or not it could fit all the animals. There have been feasibility studies on these very issues that have been documented and they have been found, not only realistic, but entirely reasonable. The dimensions of the ark are given in Genesis 6:15, with measurements that are comparable to any of the large ocean going vessels today. It had 3 levels (v. 16). Since there are not more than 25,000 species of land animals (extinct and living), and the average size of all animals are smaller than a sheep, it has been calculated that each pair put in the "rooms" that were prepared for them would only use about half of the arks capacity. As for the question in regards to the larger animals, we must remember than most creatures are rather small, like mice and rabbits, etc, and few are large like the elephants and brontosauras' etc, and of these, it would not be necessary to take the largest ones, but rather, the smaller young ones. As for feeding all these creatures, let us remember that they would not need to consume alot of food when they were in their pens, and there is a great possibility that many of them would have entered into a hybernation mode.

Science, True or False

Noel

Canada

noel@accordingtothescriptures.org

October 13, 2006 12:14 AM

Many today have drifted from true science. Science was once described as knowledge based on data that was observable and repeatable. This would put both creation and evolution into the category of faith. However, many today would like to call the evolutionary hypothesis "science". Have we seen anything evolve into another species? Of course not! This is why evolutionists like to use the magic wand of time. We cannot see it happening because it happens too slowly! But lets face the facts. In the fossil record we have only fossils of extinct creatures, and fossils of living creatures, and there are no intermediate links in the fossil record between any of the kinds. Evolutionists appropriately call these "missing-links". Many evolutionists have honestly acknowledged this vast void of evidence and argue one with another on how best to answer this.

However, if we would look honestly at the fossil record, we would see species that are extinct and species that are still alive, with no intermediate links. We should not have a problem with extinction for it is happening today, but lets not say that those fossils whose counterpart we have never seen alive in our lifetime have changed into another species. If you do, where is your evidence? Do not just say, "there is lots of evidence", produce it! Just because evolution is touted as science, it does not make it a fact.

What the fossil record says to me, is, In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. After six days He finished His work and pronounced it very good. From that time forward, nothing has been created, we only see death and decay which was introduced by the sin of one man, and as a result of the subsequent curse on the very elements from which man and all the creatures were made. This is in complete harmony with the two immutable and fundamental scientific laws of Thermodynamics which precisely contradict the idea of evolution. Because science ( the laws of thrermodynamics) has proven that nothing is being created today, and that the whole universe, and all systems and processes are running down, decaying and becoming disorganized, it proves that the universe must have had a beginning, otherwise it would already be dead. These Laws are entirely contradictory to the philosophy of evolution which states that everything is moving upward, and and increasing in quantity and complexity, yet most scientists ignore this, and as a result keep on perpetuating the false notion of evolution.

There are other scientific Laws, such as the Law of Cause and Effect, which basically states that no effect can be greater than its cause. The whole wonderful and marvellous creation with its intricate patterns and designs becons an Almighty Creator and master Designer greater than itself.

The Law of Biogenesis states that life must come from life. And all things, therefore, must come from the Living God.

He He!!

Christian Biology Teacher

Virginia

wefrdfsd@aol.com

October 24, 2006 12:43 PM

The reason my 5 year old son does not understand simple things like death, living to be 80 years old, 3 miles, and that he needs to make his bed... is because his brain is not developed enough to process that deep of information.. yet (hopefully). The same goes for adults! Some of which have stronger processing power than others... no one can argue that.
My best explaination for for why some people cannot understand
evolution and the age of the earth is they simply do not have enough processing power, to be kind at best, or they are very close-minded afraid of learning something that might actually challenge their beliefs. We are wasting our time trying to convince these weak, narrow-minded people. They will never spend time studying, equally, both sides. No wonder they are so brain washed. Want evidence of this.. read the daughter's comments. Wake up people...
IT IS POSSIBLE TO BELIEVE IN GOD AND EVOLUTION! It is arrogant to think any one of us has all of the answers.

God VS Evolution

Noel

Canada

noel@accordingtothescriptures.org

October 28, 2006 11:15 PM

IT IS NOT POSSIBLE to believe in the God of the Bible, that is, believe what He says in the first eleven chapters of Genesis, and to believe in evolution. You cannot find any hints of evolution in the Bible, rather, you find a strong refutation of evolution. However, I will say, that it is possible to be a Christian and a biologist, and to find complete harmony in the observations of nature with the Scriptures.

Are You Serious Noel?

Scott

November 19, 2006 11:57 AM

Noel - You state on October 12/2006's post that there are no more than 25,000 species living & extinct. Are you serious? You also state that it would not be necessary to take the larger animals on the ark. WHY???? Animals like T-REX, Brontasaurus, Allisaurus and the hundreds of species of dinosaurs, not to mention the HUGE gigantic mammals that are now extinct like Balacterium [sic], woolly mammoths. Did you also consider that not all animals are build for the same climate? They'd die! A Penguin in the Arctic? Or a giraffe in a cold icy climate. Explain that one? Plus you also state that while Noah placed his 2 T-Rexs in their Pens (Where is that mentioned in the bible?) they did not require food. Oh really? Are you telling us that for 40 days none of those animals ate meat or anything? T-Rex just thought, oh what the hell I won't eat anything?? If you can pick apart one story in the bible - like Noah's Ark which is an easy one, the rest of it falls down like a house cards because it opens the whole thing up for scrutiny. The fact is, those who wrote the bible believed what they were writing was true. And said they were inspired by God. Big Deal. I could say the same thing. Anybody could write a collection of fictional stories and place it in a book and claim it was non-fiction. During the time of it's writing it was difficult to disprove, but with the aid of modern science that is no longer the case. Religious people ignore facts and visual evidence and hold steadfast to hope and words written by humans whose names they don't know, whose mental stability is unknown and whose bias was clearly slanted toward the material they were writing about.

Further....

Scott

November 19, 2006 12:07 PM

Just imagine a Penguin in the desert, a Koala Bear native to Austrailia, a Polar Bear, a Giraffe and a Camel all living in the same climate - on Noah's Ark....How would that work? A Camel would not survive in the cold, a Penguin would not survive in the heat and a Koala needs it's leaves to eat. A T-Rex would need to eat meat. Noel mentions hibernation. This is brought about due to climate change and typically during cold weather. Not all circumstances suit all animals simultaneously. Like I said - the Noah's Ark story is riddled with holes and is obviously FICTION. If it is FICTION - chances are most of the bible is fiction as well. I have studied legendary folklore my entire life and to date after 25 years of research 100% of the legends I have set out to disprove have been disproved. In 100% of the cases I have found shreds of truth with 90% of the story accumulating fiction with each telling of the story. Tell a story to your friend and have him repeat it to another and so forth....expand that to decades or centruries of telling and stories become distorted. If the Christian version of the history of world is correct - it means that all other religions on earth have got it wrong.

The Greatest Novel Written

Tom

Canada

tmoore186@shaw.ca

November 21, 2006 12:02 PM

Noel, you are a very intelligent man, that is obvious to anyone reading your post. I can appreciate your arguments, however, they are selective at best. The cases you choose to rebuke, you use as conclusive proof of creation. I love the ark rationalization, 25,000 species....OK lets take that figure. Noah and his family, let me try to remember from my days of going to church there was 6 of them, or 9 of them in Noahs family. You are going to reasonably tell me that 9 ppl crossed the earth, with horse and buggy , about the fastest transportation at the time and collected 25,000 species of animal from every corner of the earth. They got the younger ones to help preserve space, oh man I wish I could have seen that, unarmed ppl taking the young bear cubs from their mom, but of course they had to take the time to look at the sex so they would not take 2 of the same sex. I guess they would have had help from God though, because for us to reasonably believe that as each family member were returning with their approx. 3000 species each that each animal was cooperating. The sheer time needed to find, collect and transport these animals debunks , in my mind, Noahs Ark as any reasonable event. If we assume God loaned Noahs family the ability to teleport, for time purposes of course, or maybe if that sounds like to crazy an idea God must have told each animal telepathically haul butt to the ark because the ship is sailing and you dont want to miss it. That is assuming your 25,000 population figure. Lets look at the world today. There an an estimated 21,000 species of fish. You introduced 2 miles of what is assumably salt water according to your world creation model. Seeing as the primary type of water on the earth is salt and that creation split one major body of water into two, with the second suspended in animation around the earth, ohh man where do I start. Where did fresh water fish come from??????? You flooded the earth with salt water therefore killing fresh water fish, unless God made them able to survive in salt water for a mimimum of 40 days and nights , but most assuredly longer. Or are you going to say that the upper body of water was fresh water, after all it was rain so then how does introducing 2 miles of fresh water affect the salinity of the oceans, and therefore the survivability of the salt water fish. Or did they have fish tanks back then somehow and caught all the fresh water fish and had them on the ark too. After all we know there is no way that any of the fish 'evolved' the ability to change from fresh to salt water, or vice versa, after all 'evolution' is non existent, unless of course it helps your case. Next, when this novel ( the bible ) was written species study was minimal at best. A conservative estimate on the number of insect species on the planet is 900 thousand. WHOA, that cant be.

The Greatest Novel Written part2

Tom

Canada

tmoore186@shaw.ca

November 21, 2006 12:05 PM

We are at an impass here, how could there be 900 thousand species of insect on the planet, after all everything died in the flood, only animals on the ark survived, that means now that each of Noahs family had to wrangle over 100 thousand species of insect. I would love to get into the breeding habits of insects, life spans, etc etc. but I will leave to the imagination the reality of the situation. Assuming God told all the animals to behave, not reproduce, and not eat which he must have because nothing would have survived a minimum of 40 days and 40 night on a boat with 900 thousand different species of insect breeding at will, in an enviroment with no food provided....oh yes, I forgot they all hibernated..hehehe! My obvious question is why did God ask Noah to go through the trouble of building an ark. Why not just amass the creatures neccesary and flood the earth with Noahs family and the creatures in a protected section of earth. It would seem the far more logical solution than trying to amass over one billion separate species onto a boat. We know God has the power , after all he loaned it to Moses to part the Red Sea, would have been a piece of cake for the almighty. As easy as it would be to continue attacking the reality of the ark , its existence, the story blah blah blah the best thing to do is remember the whole premise of religion...fear! You must follow the teachings of the almighty, God, Jesus, Allah, Zeus, Gumby, Barney the Dinosaur or any of the other Deities. If you dont do as you are told you have to deal with the repercussions. The church I went to you had to fear burning in hell for eternity. That is a fairly good motivator as long as you buy it. The Catholic church practice has been to abolish anyone or thing that threatens the validity of its teachings. Sticking to a scientific theme in tune with this post, read the story of Nicholas Copernicus, and Galileo Galilei. This is one of the great example of religion blanket of fear, inhibiting but fortunately not eliminating scientific progress and use this case to remember the lengths to which the church has gone to protect its false teachings. Nicholas Copernicus believed, and hadproof that the earth was not the center of the universe, as was believed at the time by the church Copernicus so feared the repercussions of the church, and a declaration of being a heretic so much he postponed publication of his studies until before he was near death. His studies in the early 1500 's led him to believe the earth was not the center of the solar system. The prevailing teachings of the church were that the earth was the center of the universe, and everything else rotated around it. Copernicus believed the Sun was the center of the universe and the other bodies rotated around the sun. Galileo lived about 100 years later, he had built a telescope and observed the Milky Way was made of stars, that Jupiter had at least 4 moons as well as the apparent rotation of the planets around the Sun. Galileo also was the person that first attempted to explain the phenomenon of tides.The long story short, Galileo published a book on his findings and for publishing anything deemed pro-Copernicus he was charged with heresy by the church. The church forced him to renounce his beliefs, threw him in jail, burned his publishing and then read his sentence in every University in an obvious attempt to scare other 'scientists' into not speaking against any church belief. iT was not until over 100 years later when under overwhelming evidence, and public opinion the Catholic church was forced to accept the fact the Sun was the center of the universe. The churches reign of fear, not factual teachings held back what we all now know and believe, and they did this successfully for over 200 years.

The Greatest Novel Written part3

tom

Canada

tmoore186@shaw.ca

November 21, 2006 12:08 PM

Our society is stunted by the overwhelming influence the church, or for that matter religion still possesses. In my opinion the largest single thing anyone should fear today is religion. Noel, I respect your right to choose, I believe in the right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, but when those church doors close all of those freedoms are revoked, you believe what you are told implicity, if you dont you will burn in hell for all eternity, such an objective use of a Sunday! Good luck to you all, do your own research on a topic please, dont read someone elses opinions and because they agree, or differ with yours they must be correct, or that they are a whack-job. It is your right, and your responsibility to form an opinion based on your own research and conclusions.
I have read some great novels in my time, but in my opinion, the greatest novel written is the Bible.

Well Done Tom!

Scott